Rose-tinted Nostalgia: Gary Busey.

Ah, Gary Busey. Internet meme, running punchline and scary, scary man. He's one of the stars the internet has latched onto and created a whole new mystique and fanbase for. Sure, he's not quite up there with Christopher Walken and Chuck Norris, but he's getting there. After all, you know you've made it on the internet when you have your very own popular spoof twitter account.

Busey's popularity seems to be largely down to the fact that he acts completely insane and seems to embrace his unhinged image with open arms. Its actually pretty easy to forget that this guy has been in some pretty big movies. Hell, he was even Oscar nominated once upon a time.

There was once an age, not too long ago when Gary Busey was the go-to guy for a psychotic, villainous henchman. It was an age when action stars were action stars; wise-cracking, playing against the rules, and sporting very, very bad hair. It was also an age when Busey hadn't quite descended into self parody.

In Lethal Weapon and Under Siege, Busey got to ham it up as a bad guy in two of the most popular action movies of the 80's and 90's. He was a minor star, popping up in big movies like Point Break and Predator 2. He was even given a shot at playing the action hero himself, although the less said about films like Bulletproof the better. But all in all, Busey, despite the toothy grin and tendency to overact had enough respect in Hollywood to get some big parts. When he was given some decent scenery to chew, he was pretty damn good at it as well.

Nobody really takes Gary Busey seriously now. However, despite being a very, ahem, unorthodox actor, he was once wanted. Maybe Mr. Stallone should have given him a call too....

Everybody loves Michael J. Fox.

It is very rarely that I would get excited about a one episode guest star in a show I don't even watch. For Michael J. Fox, however, I will make an exception. Yup, according to Entertainment Weekly Marty McFly himself is to make an appearance in "The Good Wife" playing a "shrewd and cynical litigator" who exploits the symptoms of his neurological condition to his own advantage. I cannot claim to be an expert on "The Good Wife" but this really is good news.

Fox semi-retired from acting nearly ten years ago now to concentrate on his family and finding a cure for Parkinson's disease, which he was diagnosed with back in 1991 (although he did no go public with it until 1998). Whilst his reasons were very understandable, it was a sad loss for the entertainment industry. Fox's condition has limited him, but he remains one of the funniest and most likeable actors around. Of course, the glimmer of hope in his decision was the fact that it was a semi-retirement rather than an outright departure from the limelight.

Michael J. Fox has worked fairly regularly as a guest star throughout the last ten years. His characters now have to incorporate the limitations of his condition but his talent has always shone through. Fox's appearance in "Scrubs" as an obsessive compulsive super doctor in 2004 came at a point when the show was arguably peaking. For much of the two episodes he appears in, the surrounding characters seem to be inspired and in awe of the doctor he plays. This, I would imagine, required very little acting from Zach Braff and co. Fox is one of the most popular actors around; audiences have liked him for his nice-guy image long before Marty Mcfly burst onto our screens in Back to the Future way back in 1985. Not only that, but the attitude and awareness raised since his diagnosis with Parkinson's disease has been inspirational.

It is true that Michael J. Fox has bigger and far more important battles to fight than pursuing his acting career, but it is always good to hear that he is working again, even if it is the occasional one-off guest appearance. Viewers young and old are not going to forget him in a hurry and I can't imagine anyone being upset to see him popping up in their favourite show. I hope to see a lot more of him in the future.

A word on the new Spider-Man

I like Andrew Garfield. He was one of the best things about The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus and was excellent in the Red Riding trilogy. Now he's nabbed one of the biggest parts available for a young actor, and its interesting casting to say the least.

I have to admit, I'm not exactly going to be at the front of the queue when the new film comes out. As far as I'm concerned, the franchise went stale with the best talent available in Sam Raimi and I don't exactly see how refreshing a reboot will be. I'd love to be proved wrong however, and with the casting of Andrew Garfield and with Marc Webb on board as director, things certainly seem to be heading in the right director.

The thing that surprised me about the casting was that all the talk about the film has been that it was aiming to return to a young, teen aged Peter Parker, which seemed like a perfectly fine idea. Garfield is nearly 27, and though youthful in appearance, could be well into his mid 30's if the film gets a couple of sequels. It seems to be going against a lot of the things the producers were talking up, especially when much of the casting rumours were going with someone much younger like Aaron Johnson (20) or Logan Lerman (18). We'll have to see how long Garfield can convince as a teenager for, but this doesn't seem to be much of a concern for Hollywood; they haven't exactly been too concerned about actors being the same age as their characters in the past.

As for Webb, we'll have to see if he can pull this off. He'll certainly bring the heart back to the franchise that was so missing from Spider-Man 3. (500) Days of Summer was an excellent achievement in having just the right amount of emotion and strong characterisation without getting too cheesy. My only concern is that he could "do a Marc Forster." Forster is a director who has made great films and is much respected but when it came to making a big budget summer tentpole in Quantum of Solace, he just didn't have the action directing chops. In the end we had baffling action sequences that looked like a poor man's Bourne. I have no doubt Webb will get the angst of a teenage Peter Parker right, but the action's got to be impressive too. It is Spider-Man after all.

Reasons to love IMDb user ratings #2:

M. Night Shyamalan's career trajectory in IMDb user ratings:

The Sixth Sense (1999) - 8.2

Unbreakable (2000) - 7.3

Signs (2002) - 6.9

The Village (2004) - 6.6

Lady in the Water (2006) - 5.8

The Happening (2008) - 5.2

The Last Airbender (2010) - 4.4

There's a pretty unmistakable trend going on here. I still had hope for this guy long after most people had given up on him. It may have become a bit cliché these days but The Sixth Sense was a truly great and inventive film and, despite having one of the world's most anti-climatic endings ever, Unbreakable was certainly an interesting premise.

The thing is, when you see a trend like this, and M. Night Shyamalan's ever decreasing reputation in the public eye, you have to wonder why a studio would hand him $200 million to direct in a genre that he's completely unproven in.

It will be interesting to see where Shyamalan goes from here. The Last Airbender might just irreparably damage his career but surely, SURELY he can't make a film that will get a lower IMDb rating than that. Can he?

Reasons to love IMDB user ratings #1:

With a current rating of 3.6, Sex and the City 2 is currently level with Plan 9 from Outer Space, the film often voted the worst of all time (despite being ridiculously entertaining, even if it was unintentional). I would rather watch a million Plan 9's than Sex and the City 2, but its nice to see how the public rates this crap.

Stephen Norrington: The only reason to pay attention to The Crow remake.

I've argued in the past that I'm not as anti-remakes as many critics tend to be but sometimes I look at one of Hollywood's latest reboots/reimaginings/regurgitations and I am completely baffled. The Crow, a rather good but not classic 1994 comic book adaptation starring the late Brandon Lee was perfectly good on its own. Yet now, just 16 years after it was originally released we're being treated to a completely pointless reboot of the franchise. Ordinarily I'd steer clear of a film like this and just pretend it never existed but something about it has taken my interest; the fact that Stephen Norrington is writing and directing it.

To most people that name is probably unfamiliar. To a group of die hard Alan Moore fans on the other hand, the name Stephen Norrington will probably fill them with an uncontrollable rage. Norrington after all, was the man that helmed the epically disastrous League of Extraordinary Gentlemen in 2003 and was part of one of the most infamous actor-director conflicts in film history.

It was no secret that 'LXG' had a troubled production. You only have to look at the shoddy, incomplete-feeling final product to guess that all was not well throughout the film's shoot. It would be an understatement to say that Sean Connery, the film's star (and the only actor in the film with any box-office pull) was not a fan of Norrington's methods. They reportedly constantly came to blows over aspects of the film and when Norrington failed to attend the film's opening party, Connery famously suggested to reporters that they "check the local asylum" to find him.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was to be Connery's last live-action film before retirement; a retirement that he has refused to be tempted out of, even to return to the Indiana Jones franchise (extremely good judgement in retrospect). It was also, however, the last film that Norrington made; the director had such a disastrous experience during the film's shoot that he vowed never to direct a film again.

So it is upon finding that Norrington will direct The Crow remake that my interest in the film spiked. His return to directing is not completely out of the blue; Norrington has been attached to direct several films in recent years, including the Clash of the Titans remake and Freddy vs. Jason, before pulling out. It will be an interesting to see how a man who has been convinced to give directing another shot will do on his return though. Many sceptics will describe Norrington as a hack and point to LXG as an example of why he should never have returned in the first place. However, Norrington did direct Blade; once again not a classic, but a perfectly good comic book adaptation and it would be unfair to condemn someone for one bad film. It is only when a director has been consistently bad (the Uwe Bolls and Paul W.S. Andersons of this world) that we should begin to pass such judgements. I still believe The Crow is a terrible choice of film to make a comeback, but I'll still keep an eye on it. After all, everybody deserves a second chance.

MGM's problems are bad news for film fans.

Just months after the announcement that Bond 23 was to be indefinitely delayed while MGM looks to be sold off we've received the highly disappointing news that Guillermo del Toro has been forced to drop out of directing The Hobbit films due to delays and uncertainty over production. Anyone that had seen del Toro's extremely atmospheric fantasy work on The Devil's Backbone, Pan's Labyrinth and to a lesser extent the Hellboy franchise will realise what a big loss this is. Bar Peter Jackson himself del Toro really did seem the most perfect fit for The Hobbit; creative, unique and completely devoted to the source material. However, with work on the film now likely to take 6 years rather than 3, it was a commitment del Toro simply could not make.

Whilst its a sad loss to the film it is completely understandable that del Toro would drop out. The man has many future projects that he has had to delay or pass on due to The Hobbit films and simply couldn't afford to be waiting around with the uncertainty surrounding MGM. The sad fact is that MGM's financial problems have stopped two very lucrative and exciting franchises in their tracks. Bond films are more popular than ever, particular as we have the best Bond for decades. But with the ongoing delays one begins to wonder if we will even see Daniel Craig don the tuxedo again. Its a massive shame because, with the announcement of Sam Mendes as director, there were big reasons to look forward to a new Bond.

MGM has a proud history and the image of that roaring lion has become an iconic part of film history. The potential for the studio to go bankrupt is completely unthinkable but uncertainty remains. There doesn't seem to be a buyer in sight and debts are still crippling. One would have to assume that the Bond and Hobbit franchises would survive even if MGM didn't but any true film fan would be hoping to see these films in the not too distant future with that lion still roaring before the opening credits.